If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

The only thing it demonstrates is that you've both got different definitions of tall poppy syndrome - with pinkfunkybeat's being slightly more correct, ie. poppies of merit, rather than mere popularity.

But I think what Canonical have done does deserves merit. Being one of the players in increasing the popularity of desktop Linux is only one of those things.

For that matter, so does Redhat, Suse, IBM, etc, etc (obviously).

I don't think to praise one company that's it's a requirement to sledge another.

But that was clearly not what you were implicating with the 'around these parts' comment. Haters gonna hate but they're not going to hate because something is good; rather, they'll hate as either a reaction to populist consensus, as a form of tribalistic masturbation, or due to negative experiences ie. not good. What you think about the merit of X has very little to do with why Joe Troll is a hater.

I don't think to praise one company that's it's a requirement to sledge another.

But that was clearly not what you were implicating with the 'around these parts' comment. Haters gonna hate but they're not going to hate because something is good; rather, they'll hate as either a reaction to populist consensus, as a form of tribalistic masturbation, or due to negative experiences ie. not good. What you think about the merit of X has very little to do with why Joe Troll is a hater.

The above is but a sub-set of why haters gonna hate.

Originally Posted by energyman

once more Shuttleworth played with the media to generate hype and once more phoronix failed for it.

Originally Posted by energyman

the hype? the hype started when ubuntu wasn't even released. And since then everything ubuntu does is sold to the media as new, ground breaking and awesome.

While most of the time they just copy something from some other distro.

Are not even good at it.

And it isn't even noteworthy.

And then ubuntards flock together to a great circle jerk on every linux related site.

To which Ragas seemed to agree.

Originally Posted by Ragas

Agreed!

Originally Posted by energyman

most distributions give something back. Paying kernel/glibc/gcc/driver devs - you know, the stuff that is hard to do and not as 'fun' or 'rewarding' thant adding a patch to gnome to add some needed functions to the desktop menu.

Ubuntu is pretty... lazy about all that. Loudmouthed, yes.

But the worst thing is, Shuttleworth farts something into his blog and sites like Phoronix report it like it will be there just right around the corner.

Originally Posted by energyman

and after installing ubuntu you go on hunting 'dev' packages because ubuntu follows the brain deadness of several other distros not including header files. Idiotic.

Originally Posted by energyman

with the exception of fedora maybe: no, there would not be an article about it.

And there was no announcement. All that happend was that Shuttleworth wrote in his blog that ubuntu might use wayland at some point in the future.

And phoronix, as ubuntu's little bitch, had to make an exciting 'announcement' out if it, furthering the mindless hype around ubuntu.

Besides, there is much more than wayland - and so far I have not seen any indication why it is so great to get orgasmic about it.

The problem is, there is something with ubuntu and phoronix (and other former linux sites) blow it completely out of proportion.

Why not doing something usefull? Like posting about all those bugs in ubuntu?

Originally Posted by energyman

other linux sites are less ubuntu centric and are doing well. They DO report security 'events' - which is a reason to visit them. Reading about the latest fart on the ubuntu blogs - not.

So which of your examples doesn't fit into the defined categories, exactly? The 'Ubuntu contributes nothing' meme is largely just the latest post hoc rationalisation for categories one and two. As for people decrying Phoronix's reporting of every Ubuntu 'fart', they're right! You don't have to even be a hater to acknowledge that Phoronix is to journalism what McDonalds is to fine dining. I mean we're talking about a site that continually publishes essentially meaningless benchmarks, despite repeated calls for more robust data, makes stories out of blog posts and still insists to this day that 'Steam is coming to Linux', based on only the most tenuous of evidence and ignoring all evidence to the contrary - like, say, Valve's flat out denials.

Really.

Yes? Unless you're suggesting that any criticism of product X is the result of an overarching bias for product Y, there's no disagreement, here.

And none of this has anything to do with the fact that you were misusing a term and your dialogue with pinkfunkybat was rendered nonsensical because he wasn't. Pointing out people who clearly disagree with you that heralding the masses is a necessarily meritorious act isn't doing anything to bolster your revised argument.

The only thing it demonstrates is that you've both got different definitions of tall poppy syndrome - with pinkfunkybeat's being slightly more correct, ie. poppies of merit, rather than mere popularity.

I responded with

Originally Posted by mugginz

But I think what Canonical have done does deserves merit.

And then you responded with

Originally Posted by etnlWings

But that was clearly not what you were implicating with the 'around these parts' comment. Haters gonna hate but they're not going to hate because something is good; rather, they'll hate as either a reaction to populist consensus, as a form of tribalistic masturbation, or due to negative experiences ie. not good. What you think about the merit of X has very little to do with why Joe Troll is a hater.

I assume you were refering to my comment

Originally Posted by mugginz

I see that tall poppy syndrome is still strong around these parts.

My belief that Canonical's efforts have merit has a relationship with my view that a lot of the anti Canonical sentiments are the result of tall poppy syndrome so yes, my statement "But I think what Canonical have done does deserves merit" is tied to my "I see that tall poppy syndrome is still strong around these parts" and so I would disagree with your assertion "that was clearly not what you were implicating with the 'around these parts' comment." To clarify, I believe that Ubuntu's popularity is merit based, and not simply the result of some magical spell cast upon the Linux using masses.

If Canonical's works had no merit then I'd likely find myself uninterested in the subject.

I also responed to your

Originally Posted by etnlWings

Haters gonna hate but they're not going to hate because something is good; rather, they'll hate as either a reaction to populist consensus, as a form of tribalistic masturbation, or due to negative experiences ie. not good. What you think about the merit of X has very little to do with why Joe Troll is a hater.

with

Originally Posted by mugginz

The above is but a sub-set of why haters gonna hate.

To which you asked

Originally Posted by etnlWings

So which of your examples doesn't fit into the defined categories, exactly?

Of course none of the quotations I referenced above need fit your two listed categories

Category one: they'll hate as either a reaction to populist consensus, as a form of tribalistic masturbation,

Category two: or due to negative experiences ie. not good.

for there to be the existance of other motivations behind trollish posts. False dichotomy anyone?

But what about simple old "look at me, look at me" syndrome? Others wanting to move the spotlight of attention away from "that other brand" and onto their own chosen brand. Tear down those others in order to build up someone else in the view of the masses.

I guess at least you yourself seem to agree that the Ubuntu distribution is a worthwhile entity.

Originally Posted by etnlWings

And yes, Ubuntu users are largely retarded but it's a pretty solid distro.

As to your comments referring to the newsworthyness of the Phoronix article I'm inclined to leave that with you and others to contemplate.

To your;

Originally Posted by ;156076

Yes? Unless you're suggesting that any criticism of product X is the result of an overarching bias for product Y, there's no disagreement, here.

I'm not suggesting that any critisism is due to bias, just some of them.

Originally Posted by ;156076

And none of this has anything to do with the fact that you were misusing a term and your dialogue with pinkfunkybat was rendered nonsensical because he wasn't.

If the term you're referring to is "tall poppy syndrome" then see above. If it's not, please clarify.

But if you believe that the anti-Ubuntu hate is due to the tall poppy syndrome, which is caused by Ubuntu's real and measurable merit, then why are there virtually no Fedora-haters or Debian-haters? I admit that there are some gentoo-haters and SUSE-haters, but they are also very few in comparison.

I think that the disproportionate amount of hate Ubuntu gets is caused by the fact that many people see a disconnect between the actual merit and the praise they receive. A part of it is also fueled by elitism, and a part is typical Linux distro-warfare typical.

My belief that Canonical's efforts have merit has a relationship with my view that a lot of the anti Canonical sentiments are the result of tall poppy syndrome so yes, my statement "But I think what Canonical have done does deserves merit" is tied to my "I see that tall poppy syndrome is still strong around these parts" and so I would disagree with your assertion "that was clearly not what you were implicating with the 'around these parts' comment."

Well then if you were seriously suggesting that people hate it because it's good, or of merit, then I really don't know what to say. Surely you must acknowledge that your own motivations aren't necessarily shared by everyone else? 'I like x 'cause it's good, therefore the haters must hate it 'cause it's good, too'.

Of course none of the quotations I referenced above need fit your two listed categories

That's 3, you've combined 1 and 2.

False dichotomy anyone?

But what about simple old "look at me, look at me" syndrome? Others wanting to move the spotlight of attention away from "that other brand" and onto their own chosen brand. Tear down those others in order to build up someone else in the view of the masses.

Okay, fine. For the sake of argument, let us say that doesn't conform with tribalistic masturbation. What does that have to do with tall poppy syndrome?

Again, we're back at square one: merit. If troller be trollin' for his own self-amusement and/or to satisfy his histrionic inclinations, it really doesn't have anything to do with Ubuntu per se, it's meritorious aspects, or otherwise. You can try to insert merit all you like but it's still likely incidental and apocryphal.

But if you believe that the anti-Ubuntu hate is due to the tall poppy syndrome, which is caused by Ubuntu's real and measurable merit, then why are there virtually no Fedora-haters or Debian-haters? I admit that there are some gentoo-haters and SUSE-haters, but they are also very few in comparison.

If the table was turned and either Fedora, Debian, gentoo or Suse was getting the bulk of the bright lights and attention in the blogosphere and in magazines I think it'd be likely you would indeed see a shift of that hate from where it is and it'd move onto greener pastures.

Originally Posted by pingufunkybeat

I think that the disproportionate amount of hate Ubuntu gets is caused by the fact that many people see a disconnect between the actual merit and the praise they receive.

The hate and they way that it's expressed is interesting here. I person not prone to jumping to "tall poppy syndrome" mentality would likely find a more productive path that would possibly explore the basis for the amount of praise given. Reasons for the amount of parise could then be compared and contrasted with the actual amount of merit warranted and a reasonable statement could be made and a possible mechanism to re-balance the praise/merit balance explored if it was so requried. :-)

Originally Posted by pingufunkybeat

A part of it is also fueled by elitism, and a part is typical Linux distro-warfare typical.

The "Don't use that distro, use this one" or "My distro is better than you one" type discussions that are due to the type of elitism you speak of are generally supported by the technical reasons for the view and are a lot more constructive. I'd usually consider these more highly than the typical "Ubuntu sux" and "Why does Ubuntu get all the attention" type.

Well then if you were seriously suggesting that people hate it because it's good, or of merit, then I really don't know what to say. Surely you must acknowledge that your own motivations aren't necessarily shared by everyone else? 'I like x 'cause it's good, therefore the haters must hate it 'cause it's good, too'.

I'm suggesting that there are those that hate it because it is recieving the bulk of publicity and not because of any reasonable reasons.

If Ubuntu had no valid merit then I'd likely not be surprised at statements to that effect.

If the table was turned and either Fedora, Debian, gentoo or Suse was getting the bulk of the bright lights and attention in the blogosphere and in magazines I think it'd be likely you would indeed see a shift of that hate from where it is and it'd move onto greener pastures.

...

I'm suggesting that there are those that hate it because it is recieving the bulk of publicity and not because of any reasonable reasons.

If Ubuntu had no valid merit then I'd likely not be surprised at statements to that effect.

See, this is exactly what we've been saying: objections aren't the product of merit, therefore it's not tall poppy syndrome. Those doing the chopping are only weeding the garden.